[2017] KEHC 7445 (KLR)
The court found that, based on the summation of the evidence of the six prosecution witnesses, and in particular the testimony of PW6, the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused. Although there was no eye witness to the homicide, the circumstantial evidence presented was sufficient to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 7445 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Fred Masaki Feda
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 40 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Prima Facie Case at Close of Prosecution
- Outcome
- accused put on his defence
- Judges
- K Kimondo
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Circumstantial Evidence, Criminal Procedure
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Republic
Applicant
Fred Masaki Feda
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Prima Facie Case at Close of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused to warrant putting him on his defence.
- 2 Whether the circumstantial evidence adduced is sufficient to link the accused to the offence of murder.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, based on the summation of the evidence of the six prosecution witnesses, and in particular the testimony of PW6, the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused. Although there was no eye witness to the homicide, the circumstantial evidence presented was sufficient to require the accused to be put on his defence. The court applied the principles from Bhatt v Republic and R v Kipkering arap Koske & another, holding that the evidence, if unchallenged, could sustain a conviction. Accordingly, the accused was put on his defence under section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Court Disposition
accused put on his defence
Orders
- The accused is put on his defence under section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT ELDORET
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 40 OF 2012
REPUBLIC..…................................................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
FRED MASAKI FEDA…........…......…..................................................ACCUSED
RULING
1. The accused is charged with murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code.
2. The particulars are that on the 28th May 2012, at Uswa village, Kaplolo Location, Moiben Division, Uasin Gishu District of the Rift Valley Province, he murdered Moses Kiza Khisa.
3. He pleaded notguilty. The prosecution called sixwitnesses. I have considered the circumstantial evidence surrounding the homicide. I am alive that no eye witness came forward. Nevertheless, I have paid close attention to the evidence of PW3, PW4, PW5 and PW6. I have also considered the submissions by the learned prosecution counsel filed on 9th February 2017; and, those by the learned defence counsel filed on 13th February 2017.
4. On the summation of the evidence of the six witnesses; and, in particular that of PW6, I am persuaded that the Republic has established a prima facie case against the accused. See Bhatt v Republic [1957] E.A. 332, R v Kipkering arap Koske & another 16 EACA 135 (1949).
5. Accordingly, under the provisions of section 306 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, I put the accused on his defence.
It is so ordered.
DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED at ELDORET this 28th day of February 2017.
KANYI KIMONDO
JUDGE
Ruling read in open court in the presence of-
Accused.
Ms. Tigoi holding brief for Mrs. Lagat for the accused.
Mrs. Chelashaw holding brief for Ms. Oduor for the Republic.
Mr. J. Kemboi, Court Clerk.